Cardozo Journal of Conflict Resolution
Abstract
This Note discusses how the necessity defense, in the context of the Argentinian financial crisis arbitrations, has undermined the legitimacy of the international investment arbitration system. A discussion of the Argentinean cases listed above reveals that its application is inconsistent. A successful claim for necessity requires the following factors: (1) an essential interest must be at stake, (2) that interest must be threatened by grave and imminent peril, (3) the wrongful conduct must be the only method to protect the threatened interest, and (4) the offending government must have considered a balance of interests and must not have contributed to the situation.
Disciplines
Dispute Resolution and Arbitration | Law
Recommended Citation
Kelley Chubb,
The "State Of Necessity" Defense: A Burden, Not a Blessing to the International Investment Arbitration System,
14
Cardozo J. Conflict Resol.
531
(2013).
Available at:
https://larc.cardozo.yu.edu/cjcr/vol14/iss2/9